
European founders who plan their US expansion for year four or five often find the market already taken. David Klein of growth investor One Peak advises going earlier than feels comfortable and with more commitment than feels necessary. That means a real US presence at every customer touchpoint, and one founder who actually moves to the US.
Every European founder says they want to conquer the US market. Most of them plan to do it in three to five years.
By then, the market is gone.
The Planning Fallacy of European Expansion
David Klein has seen this pattern across dozens of portfolio companies at One Peak, one of the leading Growth Equity Investors in Europe. The founder builds a solid business in two or three European markets. Revenue is growing. The team is strong. The US is on the roadmap – somewhere in year four or five, after more consolidation at home.
The problem is that the US market does not wait. While the European founder consolidates, a competitor – often better funded, often already US-native – moves in. By the time the European company arrives, the market has shaped itself around someone else.
David’s advice is consistent: go earlier than feels comfortable, and go with more commitment than feels necessary.
What Commitment Actually Means
This is where most expansions fail – not on strategy, but on execution and investment level.
Going to the US means ensuring every customer touchpoint feels like a US business. Sales team in the US. Onboarding in the US. Customer success in the US. Not a small outpost with a single hire reporting back to European headquarters. A real presence that can be felt by the customer.
The investment required for that is not trivial. But the alternative – going in underfunded, half-present, and expecting US customers to accept a European service experience – is worse. It produces the worst outcome: money spent, reputation damaged, and a market that now associates your brand with underdelivery.
Why One of the Founders Has to Go
The single most important decision in a US expansion is not which city to base in or which sales leader to hire first. It is whether one of the founders moves.
David is direct on this. He wants to see a founder relocate. Not visit frequently. Move.
The reason is cultural. The quality of team you build in the US, the speed at which decisions get made, the way the company’s culture transfers across the Atlantic – all of this degrades when leadership is remote. A founder on a weekly call from London cannot hold the same standard as a founder in the room.
This is a hard ask. It disrupts families, friendships, routines. But the companies that get the US right almost always have a founder who made that bet personally.
The Question Worth Asking Now
David frames the decision simply: do you want to build a truly large company? If yes, you have to go to the US. The question of whether you are ready is largely irrelevant – the work is to become ready.
Waiting until you feel prepared is usually waiting too long. The right moment to start building US presence is earlier than your instinct suggests, with more resources than your budget prefers, and with a founder willing to make it their problem personally.
The market will not hold the spot open while you get comfortable with the idea.
Listen to my full conversation with David in my DEALMACHER-Podcast.

Frequently asked questions
When should a European startup expand to the US?
Earlier than feels comfortable. While a European founder consolidates at home, a competitor, often better funded and US-native, moves in and the market shapes itself around someone else.
What does commitment to the US market mean?
Every customer touchpoint has to feel like a US business: sales, onboarding and customer success in the US. A small outpost with a single hire reporting back to Europe is not enough.
Does a founder need to move to the US for expansion?
David Klein wants to see a founder relocate, not visit frequently. Team quality, decision speed and the transfer of culture degrade when leadership is remote.
What happens if a US expansion is underfunded?
It produces the worst outcome: money spent, reputation damaged, and a market that now associates your brand with underdelivery.


